I like the idea of a 'nutrition label' for publications, as we see described here about the Public Knowledge Project (PKP) example. However, I think there is room for debate about what is relevant, and what is not, in such a label. There's information about the reviewers, editorial and review process, and funding. But are the articles cited? Are they relevant, influential, or factual? What's the percentage of articles that had to be retracted? Does the journal publish replications of previous studies? Does it allow discussion? Are the papers used in courses? We need to start seeing these resources from a public, academic and scientific perspective, and not merely from a publication perspective.
Today: 3 Total: 98 [Direct link] [Share]
